IoT-Based Solutions to Monitor Water Level, Leakage, and Motor Control for Smart Water Tanks
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Automatic monitoring of water levels in tanks,
- Automatic detection of water leakage from tanks and supply pipes in the proximity,
- Automated tanks refilling while avoiding the dry run of motors or pumps, and
- Providing access to the end-users to control and observe relevant activities remotely.
- A comprehensive survey of related work,
- Reviewing recent technologies and techniques,
- Exploring existing software and hardware platforms for IoT-WST, and
- Highlighting the cyber security threats.
2. Background
2.1. Traditional Monitoring
2.2. Off-line Automated Monitoring
- Sensor: It can detect modifications in its surroundings and transfer collected data to relevant electronic modules (e.g., a microprocessor). Notably, a sensor is always supplemented with other electronic modules (e.g., analog-to-digital converter (ADC)) for proper signal conditioning [75].
- Actuator: it is a device (e.g., transistor, electromechanical relay, and thyristor), which is capable of causing machines or devices to run.
- Processor: In embedded systems, dedicated microprocessors (also called microcontrollers) are utilized. In general, a microcontroller unit (MCU) is called a true computer on a single chip, which has all necessary peripherals (e.g., memory, timers/counters, digital and analog input/output (I/O) ports, ADC, and digital-to-analog converter (DAC)) on-chip. This unit can easily read sensors data, process, store, and update output devices (e.g., liquid crystal module (LCM)) if required, and transfer data to other devices and machines if needed.
- Supportive electronic components: (e.g., power supply unit, buffers, resistors, and diodes) are always required to power up the target system, integrate sensors with I/O ports, etc.
2.3. WSN-Based Monitoring
2.4. Smart Monitoring
- Reduced Cost: As it uses the existing communication infrastructure of the internet, the overall cost for the system’s development has been reduced, e.g., no personal communication network is generally required.
- Higher Spatial Resolution: As its backbone is based on the internet, its spatial resolution is ideally infinite. It implies that monitoring water storage tank is possible from any corner of the globe wherever access to the internet is possible.
- Reduced Computational Cost: In general, a sensor node should be equipped with an ordinary MCU/CPU (Central processing unit) based kit (e.g., NodeMCU [85], ESP8266 Transceiver [85] or Arduino Nano 33-IoT [86]) and any heavy computational load should be shed to IoT cloud servers, e.g., IBM, Adafruit, Blynk, Arduino, and Ubidots IoT platform [79]. Thus, the use of hi-tech computing devices such as the DE1 SoC FPGA board [75] and the Raspberry Pi 4 Model-B [87] could be avoided.
- Lowered Energy Requirement: While shedding complex computations (heavy load) to cloud servers, sensors nodes could be in the relaxed mode, i.e., doing less work and staying mostly in the idle/sleeping modes. Therefore, a small battery could also be used to energize sensors nodes in the energy crisis sites.
- Real-time Feedback: Embedded systems centered around IoT technology can supply real-time feedback to its end-users via a short message service (SMS), tweeter, email, and Facebook.
3. Methodology
Smart Storage Tanks: Results and Discussion
4. Recent Technologies and Techniques
4.1. Water Level Monitoring
4.2. Water Leakage Monitoring
- Portable Sensors: In numerous studies [59,60,110], water sensors were used (Figure 4) to detect water leakage. Generally, one sensor is sufficient for each potential point where water leakage is strongly expected to occur. As mentioned earlier, this type of sensor has two sets of parallel naked metallic layers, where one set is connected with a positive voltage terminal and the other one tied to the negative voltage terminal of the power supply. When its sensory part meets water, this event changes the analog output of this sensor.
- Water Flow Sensors: Figure 9 shows typical hall-effect-based flow sensors, which are used in many applications such as measuring the flow of water and oil, DIY coffee machines, water vending machines, etc. These sensors come in different sizes and ratings, per the system’s requirements. The main components of a flow sensor include the hall-effect sensor, turbine wheel (also called rotor), and magnet. When water flows through the valve, it rotates the turbine that produces the magnetic field. This change in the magnetic field is sensed by the hall-effect sensor, producing square pulses.
- Digital Signal Processing: In addition to the above-mentioned schemes, researchers also devised numerous digital signal processing-based techniques to detect water leakage [51,67,68,80,108]. Whenever an abrupt leakage occurs in the supply line, this drastic change produces a spike in a digital filter (e.g., Kalman filter). This spike is a sign of water leakage.
4.3. Tanks Auto Refilling
- Dry-Run: This means the water pump or motor attempts to refill the tank, but water is not available in the source (e.g., supply line from local municipality). This state should be avoided because it may increase the electricity bills.
- Electromechanical Relays: Relays are often utilized to energize water pumps or motors. As shown in Figure 10a, the layout of each device is printed on its casing, or the device may have a transparent casing through which designers may note its connection. For more details, readers are recommended to consult the technical specifications of target relays on its vendor’s webpage or released documents.
- Thyristors: As relays are electromechanical devices, their performance is defined in terms of switching. In addition, the metallic contact of inexpensive relays (except vacuum type relays) may also become damaged due to the electric arching.
5. Challenges and Trends in IoT
5.1. Hardware
5.2. Cloud Servers
- Commercial IoT cloud server: Accompanying the current boom in the IoT-enabled products worldwide is a plethora of contemporary IoT cloud servers [79], such as ThingSpeak, SensorCloud, Blynk, Arduino cloud IoT, IBM IoT, Adafruit io, and others. In general, each platform can process, analyze, and store data. Moreover, most cloud servers have soft widgets for the visualization of sensors data in different formats. For example, in ThingSpeak and Blynk, developers can more comfortably use readymade widgets such as the LCM, buttons, switches, panels for live streaming video data, live tracking of GPS data on Google map, and others. Moreover, in some platforms (e.g., ThingSpeak), IoT developers can also apply ML or AI techniques to data to predict hidden patterns and features.
- While commercially available IoT cloud servers are suitable for IoT designs, they have some limitations; thus, the IoT developers may feel reluctant to use them when developing IoT-enabled products. First, most of these platforms are not cost-free. While using limited resources, the developers may still need to pay the license fee for commercial activities. Second, any valuable data is also in the hands of a third party and may not be secured against hacking hazards. Third, any malfunction or seizure of such platforms may strongly affect the reputation and work of the IoT developers. Finally, there may also exist some unwanted delays in the communication. For technical comparison and explicit details, readers are advised to consult the survey of IoT cloud servers [79], which provides instructive details.
- Private IoT cloud server: In the context of hazards involved in using commercial IoT cloud servers, developers are highly encouraged to develop their own webservers if possible. Due to a large IoT community, developers can easily custom-design cloud servers for their products, thereby having easy access to relevant books, websites, and technical documents. For example, GitHub is the largest and highly advanced development platform globally [115]. Many companies and software developers build, ship, and maintain their software-related material using this platform. In addition, many IoT development IDEs, such as Arduino cloud IoT, provide sample codes for the webservers to develop electronic gadgets, such as Arduino Nano 33 IoT, ESP8266, and NodeMCU (8266), and other numerous well-known electronic gadgets.
5.3. Cyber Security
5.4. Significant Limitations
- False Access Control: It is observed that all IoT-related devices having the same model are generally delivered to end customers with the same default password, such as ‘admin’ or ‘admin123′. In addition, the default settings and firmware are often the same for all devices of the same model. It is also observed that most end-users do not even change these default passwords and settings, thus putting the IoT-enabled systems at risk. In addition, most IoT devices do not have deep layered security. In general, end-user can access these devices using an account or a password, neither of which are enough against seasonal cybercriminals.
- Obsolete Software: Most IoT vendors generally do not provide updates to protect IoT-enabled products against cyberattacks. Besides, end-users also ignore updating the IoT-enabled products, which may cause a system breakdown and consequently monetary loss. To avoid these issues, IoT devices must be shipped with up-to-date firmware/software without any known weaknesses. In addition, there should exist update functionality for end-users or developers to fix any vulnerabilities found after device deployment.
- Deficiency of Encryption: Whenever an IoT device performs communication in the plain text format, all valuable information exchanged with a target device or backend service could be acquired by a middleman. So, any person capable of obtaining a position on the network path between the IoT device and the terminal node may easily examine network traffic and obtain any sensitive data, e.g., login credentials. Moreover, if encryption is not done completely or is misconfigured, the attackers may gain access to IoT-enabled systems. In addition, encryption should also protect the sensitive data stored on a device (at rest). In this concern, usual flaws may also be the lack of encryption by credentials or storing API tokens in plain text on IoT devices. Other complications may be the usage of poor cryptographic techniques.
- Intrusion Ignorance: After being compromised, the IoT devices often keep working as usual from the user’s viewpoint. Notably, any power or additional bandwidth usage is generally not identified. It is also observed that most IoT devices do not inherit any alerting or logging functionality to inform end-users of security-related issues. In case IoT devices have these functionalities, the concerned hacker can overwrite or disable them when IoT devices are hacked; the end-user cannot take preventive measures to mitigate the effects of cyberattacks.
- Application Weaknesses: To secure IoT devices, it is important to acknowledge vulnerabilities, if any, in the software in the first place. It is observed that software bugs can trigger malicious activity. Cybercriminals can run their own software on IoT devices and gain illegal access to the sensitive information stored on the concerned devices. Though avoiding software vulnerabilities altogether may not be possible, the developers can adopt best programming practices to escape application vulnerabilities, e.g., performing input validation consistently.
- Vendor’s Security Stance: Whenever software vulnerabilities are detected, it is for the sake of utmost reliability that the concerned vendor finds a proper patch to mitigate their effects. In this concern, the IoT vendors should offer their contact information so that end-users and developers can communicate if any bugs or security loopholes are found. Otherwise, the end-users and developers would not cease using IoT devices in the intended method, resulting in less secure IoT systems. To avoid any catastrophic situation, concerned vendors must cooperate with the end-users and developers, providing frequent updates on the security of the IoT devices and recommendations on how to securely resell or dispose of IoT devices so that the sensitive data is not passed on.
- Deficiency of Reliable Execution Environment: Every IoT device is generally equipped with a dedicated microcontroller, which is a true computer on a single chip capable of running specific software programs. The cyber attacker may install any malicious programs. For instance, they can install a software routine performing a DDoS attack. While limiting the functionality of an IoT device and the software it can run, the potential for abuse of the device is limited. For instance, the concerned IoT device may be confined to connecting only to the vendor’s cloud service. No doubt, this act of restriction may make it unproductive in a DDoS attack because such a device can no longer be able to connect target hosts arbitrarily.
- Inadequate Physical Security: Cyber attackers may open the IoT devices and can attack the hardware if they have access to these devices. For instance, hackers can bypass protective software if they can directly read the contents of memory components. After opening up IoT devices, hackers may read the device debugging contacts and perform more fatal tasks. The physical attack may have more impact if it uncovered the device key shared with all IoT devices of the same model; this act would compromise many IoT devices.
- User Interaction
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhu, G.; Zhao, G.; Zhang, Z.; Lu, X. Water quality of water source area in Taihu Lake and effect on water treatment process. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Consumer Electronics, Communications and Networks (CECNet), Xianning, China, 16–18 April 2011; pp. 3783–3786. [Google Scholar]
- Zamberlan da Silva, M.E.; Santana, R.G.; Guilhermetti, M.; Filho, I.C.; Endo, E.H.; Ueda-Nakamura, T.; Nakamura, C.V.; Dias Filho, B.P. Comparison of the bacteriological quality of tap water and bottled mineral water. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2008, 211, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yauri, R.; Rios, M.; Lezama, J. Water quality monitoring of Peruvian Amazon based in the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE XXIV International Conference on Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computing (INTERCON), Cusco, Peru, 15–18 August 2017; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Yasin, S.; Mohd Yunus, M.F.; Abdul Wahab, N. The development of water quality monitoring system using internet of things. J. Educ. Learn. Stud. 2020, 3, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yaroshenko, I.; Kirsanov, D.; Marjanovic, M.; Lieberzeit, P.A.; Korostynska, O.; Mason, A.; Frau, I.; Legin, A. Real-Time Water Quality Monitoring with Chemical Sensors. Sensors 2020, 20, 3432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xin, X.-K.; Li, K.-F.; Finlayson, B.; Yin, W. Evaluation, prediction, and protection of water quality in Danjiangkou Reservoir, China. Water Sci. Eng. 2015, 8, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- WQI. Available online: https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/pdf/global_drinking_water_quality_index.pdf (accessed on 3 June 2021).
- Wang, Z.; Wang, Q.; Hao, X. The Design of the Remote Water Quality Monitoring System Based on WSN. In Proceedings of the 2009 5th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, Beijing, China, 24–26 September 2009; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Vinod, G.; Peter, A.V.; Rao, I.S.; Sailaja, S.; Babu, Y.S. IoT based Water Quality Monitoring System Using WSN. Indian J. Public Health Res. Dev. 2018, 9, 1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urs, A.C.; Shubha, J.; Sushmitha, P.B.; Vaishnavi, A.P. Design of Smart Sensors for Real-Time Water Quality Monitoring Using IOT Technology. Int. J. Sci. Dev. Res. 2017, 2, 348–350. [Google Scholar]
- Tsihrintzis, V.A. Book Review Marcello Benedini and George Tsakiris. Water Quality Modelling for Rivers and Streams, Springer, Water Science and Technology Library Series, Volume 70, 288p, ISBN 978-94-007-5508-6. Water Resour. Manag. 2013, 27, 5299–5302. [Google Scholar]
- Thiyagarajan, K.; Pappu, S.; Vudatha, P.; Niharika, A.V. Intelligent IoT Based Water Quality Monitoring System. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2017, 12, 5447. [Google Scholar]
- Suryawanshi, V.; Khandekar, M. Design and Development of Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) for Water Quality Monitoring Using Zigbee. In Proceedings of the 2018 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS), Madurai, India, 14–15 June 2018; pp. 862–865. [Google Scholar]
- Spandana, K.; Rao, V. Internet of Things (Iot) Based Smart Water Quality Monitoring System. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 259–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, S.; Hossain, F. Spatial Assessment of Water Quality in Peripheral Rivers of Dhaka City for Optimal Relocation of Water Intake Point. Water Resour. Manag. 2008, 22, 377–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pule, M.; Ahadi, Y.; Chuma, J. Wireless sensor networks: A survey on monitoring water quality. J. Appl. Res. Technol. 2018, 15, 562–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priya, S.K.; Shenbaga, L.G.; Revathi, T. Design of smart sensors for real time drinking water quality monitoring and contamination detection in water distributed mains. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2017, 7, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Prasad, A.N.; Mamun, K.A.; Islam, F.R.; Haqva, H. Smart water quality monitoring system. In Proceedings of the 2015 2nd Asia-Pacific World Congress on Computer Science and Engineering (APWC on CSE), Nadi, Fiji, 2–4 December 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Pranata, A.; Lee, J.M.; Kim, D.-S. Towards an IoT-based water quality monitoring system with brokerless pub/sub architecture. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Local and Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN), Osaka, Japan, 12–14 June 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Peletz, R.; Kisiangani, J.; Bonham, M.; Ronoh, P.; Delaire, C.; Kumpel, E.; Marks, S.; Khush, R. Why do water quality monitoring programs succeed or fail? A qualitative comparative analysis of regulated testing systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2018, 221, 907–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pasika, S.; Gandla, S.T. Smart water quality monitoring system with cost-effective using IoT. Heliyon 2020, 6, e04096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niswar, M.; Wainalang, S.; Ilham, A.; Zainuddin, Z.; Fujaya, Y.; Muslimin, Z.; Paundu, A.; Kashihara, S.; Fall, D. IoT-based Water Quality Monitoring System for Soft-Shell Crab Farming. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things and Intelligence System (IOTAIS), Bali, Indonesia, 1–3 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Myint, C.Z.; Gopal, L.; Aung, Y.L. WSN-based reconfigurable water quality monitoring system in IoT environment. In Proceedings of the 2017 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON), Phuket, Thailand, 27–30 June 2017; pp. 741–744. [Google Scholar]
- Moparthi, N.R.; Mukesh, C.; Sagar, P.V. Water Quality Monitoring System Using IOT. In Proceedings of the 2018 Fourth International Conference on Advances in Electrical, Electronics, Information, Communication and Bio-Informatics (AEEICB), Chennai, India, 27–28 February 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Menon Kau, D.P.; Ramesh, M.V. Wireless sensor network for river water quality monitoring in India. In Proceedings of the 2012 Third International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT’12), Coimbatore, India, 26–28 July 2012; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Manoharan, S.; Sathi, Y.G.; Thiruven, K.K.; Vetriselvan, G.V.; Kishor, P. Water Quality Analyzer using IoT. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng. 2019, 8, 34–37. [Google Scholar]
- Madhavireddy, V.; Koteswarrao, B. Smart Water Quality Monitoring System Using Iot Technology. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 636–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Loganathan, G.B.; Mohan, E.; Kumar, R.S. IoT based water and soil quality monitoring system. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Technol. 2019, 10, 537–541. [Google Scholar]
- Viola, A.; Curto, D.; Franzitta, V.; Trapanese, M. Sea water desalination and energy consumption: A case study of wave energy converters (WEC) to desalination applications in sicily. In Proceedings of the OCEANS 2016 MTS/IEEE Monterey, Monterey, CA, USA, 19–23 September 2016; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, Z.; Duo, W.; Gao, C.; Gao, Z. Impacts of seawater desalination on environment. In Proceedings of the 2011 Second International Conference on Mechanic Automation and Control Engineering, Hohhot, China, 15–17 July 2011; pp. 2228–2233. [Google Scholar]
- Min-Allah, N.; Farooqui, M.; Alwashmi, A.; Almahasheer, S.; Alsufayyan, M.; Altulaihan, N. Smart Monitoring of Water Tanks in KSA. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 12–14 December 2018; pp. 1044–1047. [Google Scholar]
- Nasirudin, M.A.; Za’bah, U.N.; Sidek, O. Fresh water real-time monitoring system based on Wireless Sensor Network and GSM. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Conference on Open Systems, Langkawi, Malaysia, 25–28 September 2011; pp. 354–357. [Google Scholar]
- Suwaileh, W.; Johnson, D.; Hilal, N. Membrane desalination and water re-use for agriculture: State of the art and future outlook. Desalination 2020, 491, 114559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shankar, S.; Dakshayini, M. IoT-Mobile Enabled Smart Water Level Controlling System to Regulate Water Wastage. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), Bangalore, India, 19–22 September 2018; pp. 2045–2048. [Google Scholar]
- Adu-Manu, K.; Tapparello, C.; Heinzelman, W.; Katsriku, F.; Abdulai, J.-D. Water Quality Monitoring Using Wireless Sensor Networks: Current Trends and Future Research Directions. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. 2017, 13, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- The Nature Conservancy. Available online: https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/provide-food-and-water-sustainably/ (accessed on 30 October 2021).
- Narayanan, L.K.; Sankaranarayanan, S. IoT-based water demand forecasting and distribution design for smart city. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2019, 11, 1411–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nacht, S. Ground-water monitoring system considerations. Ground Water Monit. Remediat. 2007, 3, 33–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohebbi, S.; Zhang, Q.; Christian Wells, E.; Zhao, T.; Nguyen, H.; Li, M.; Abdel-Mottaleb, N.; Uddin, S.; Lu, Q.; Wakhungu, M.J.; et al. Cyber-physical-social interdependencies and organizational resilience: A review of water, transportation, and cyber infrastructure systems and processes. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 62, 102327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohan, S. Novel Water Monitoring System: A Python Based Aqua Monitoring System using Raspberry PI. Int. J. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2019, 7, 1648–1651. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Y.; Wang, Y.; Detai, Z.; Yin, J.; Su, J. HIRFL cooling water-monitoring system design and construct. Radiat. Detect. Technol. Methods 2018, 2, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lambrou, T.P.; Anastasiou, C.C.; Panayiotou, C.G.; Polycarpou, M.M. A Low-Cost Sensor Network for Real-Time Monitoring and Contamination Detection in Drinking Water Distribution Systems. IEEE Sens. J. 2014, 14, 2765–2772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khatri, P.; Gupta, K.K.; Gupta, R.K. Assessment of Water Quality Parameters in Real-Time Environment. SN Comput. Sci. 2020, 1, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joustra, C.M.; Yeh, D.H. Demand- and source-driven prioritization framework toward integrated building water management (IBWM). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2015, 14, 114–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, F.; Zheng, Y. Joint analysis of input and parametric uncertainties in watershed water quality modeling: A formal Bayesian approach. Adv. Water Resour. 2018, 116, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giudicianni, C.; Herrera, M.; di Nardo, A.; Carravetta, A.; Ramos, H.M.; Adeyeye, K. Zero-net energy management for the monitoring and control of dynamically-partitioned smart water systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 252, 119745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geetha, S.; Gouthami, S. Internet of things enabled real time water quality monitoring system. Smart Water 2017, 2, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franceschini, F.; Galetto, M.; Turina, E. Water and Sewage Service Quality: A Proposal of a New Multi-Questionnaire Monitoring Tool. Water Resour. Manag. 2010, 24, 3033–3050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demetillo, A.T.; Japitana, M.V.; Taboada, E.B. A system for monitoring water quality in a large aquatic area using wireless sensor network technology. Sustain. Environ. Res. 2019, 29, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Water_Monitoring_Day: EarthEcho Water Challenge. Available online: https://wwwmonitorwaterorg/ (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Daadoo, M.; Daraghmi, Y.-A. Smart Water Leakage Detection Using Wireless Sensor Networks (SWLD). Int. J. Netw. Commun. 2017, 2017, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Berman, J. WHO: Waterborne Disease is World’s Leading Killer|Voice of America—English. Available online: https://www.voanews.com/archive/who-waterborne-disease-worlds-leading-killer (accessed on 19 May 2021).
- Drinking-Water. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- WHO: Water Borne Diseases. Available online: https://wwwwhoint/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Gleick, P. Dirty Water: Estimated Deaths from Water-Related Diseases 2000–2020. Available online: https://pacinst.org/publication/569/ (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Water_in_Crisis: WATER IN CRISIS/ES? 2020. Available online: https://wwwsolidaritesorg/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/solidarites_2020_water-hygiene-barometerpdf (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- World_Water_Council: Water Crisis: Towards a Way to Improve the Situation. 2020. Available online: https://wwwworldwatercouncilorg/en/water-crisis (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Water_Borne_Diseases. Available online: https://www.voanews.com/archive/who-waterborne-disease-worlds-leading-killer (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Ahmed, U.; Mumtaz, R.; Anwar, H.; Mumtaz, S.; Qamar, A.M. Water quality monitoring: From conventional to emerging technologies. Water Supply 2019, 20, 28–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banna, M.H.; Imran, S.; Francisque, A.; Najjaran, H.; Sadiq, R.; Rodriguez, M.; Hoorfar, M. Online Drinking Water Quality Monitoring: Review on Available and Emerging Technologies. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 44, 1370–1421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klepka, A.; Broda, D.; Michalik, J.; Kulbat, M.; Małka, P.; Staszewski, W.; Stepinski, T. Leakage Detection in Pipelines—The Concept of Smart Water Supply System. In Proceedings of the 7th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Smart Structures and Materials, Ponta Delgada, Azores, Portugal, 3–6 June 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Gama-Moreno, L.A.; Corralejo, A.; Ramirez-Molina, A.; Rangel, J.A.T.; Martinez-Hernandez, C.; Juarez, M.A. A Design of a Water Tanks Monitoring System Based on Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Mechatronics, Electronics and Automotive Engineering (ICMEAE), Cuernavaca, Mexico, 22–25 November 2016; pp. 133–138. [Google Scholar]
- Rao, K.R.; Srinija, S.; Bindu, K.; Kumar, D. IOT based water level and quality monitoring system in overhead tanks. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 379. [Google Scholar]
- Redwan, F.; Rafid, S.; Abrar, A.H.; Pathik, B.B. An Exploratory Approach to Monitor the Quality of Supply-Water Through IoT Technology. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Automation, Computational and Technology Management (ICACTM), London, UK, 24–26 April 2019; pp. 137–142. [Google Scholar]
- Gunde, S.; Chikaraddi, A.K.; Baligar, V.P. IoT based flow control system using Raspberry PI. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Energy, Communication, Data Analytics and Soft Computing (ICECDS), Chennai, India, 1–2 August 2017; pp. 1386–1390. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.; Yang, X.; Sitzenfrei, R. Rethinking the Framework of Smart Water System: A Review. Water 2020, 12, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yuvaraj, T.; Krishna, N.; Manish, P.; Naik, P.; Varsha, P. Review Paper on Water Monitoring and Leakage Detection. Int. J. Res. Sci. Innov. (IJRSI) 2019, 4, 31. [Google Scholar]
- Ali, H.; Choi, J.-H. A Review of Underground Pipeline Leakage and Sinkhole Monitoring Methods Based on Wireless Sensor Networking. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Damor, P.R.; Sharma, K.J. IoT based Water Monitoring System: A Review. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Dev. 2017, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Sheltami, T.R.; Bala, A.; Shakshuki, E.M. Wireless sensor networks for leak detection in pipelines: A survey. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2016, 7, 347–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Public Utilities Board, S. Managing the water distribution network with a Smart Water Grid. Smart Water 2016, 1, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jan, F.; Min-Allah, N.; Düştegör, D. IoT Based Smart Water Quality Monitoring: Recent Techniques, Trends and Challenges for Domestic Applications. Water 2021, 13, 1729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, W.; Cheng, R.; Chou, S. Power-saving for IoT-enabled Water Dispenser System. In Proceedings of the 2019 42nd International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing (TSP), Budapest, Hungary, 1–3 July 2019; pp. 736–739. [Google Scholar]
- Val Ledesma, J.; Wisniewski, R.; Kallesøe, C.S. Smart Water Infrastructures Laboratory: Reconfigurable Test-Beds for Research in Water Infrastructures Management. Water 2021, 13, 1875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiki_Pedia. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/ (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Pujar, P.; Kenchannavar, H.; Kulkarni, U.P. Wireless Sensor Network based Water Monitoring Systems: A survey. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference on Applied and Theoretical Computing and Communication Technology (iCATccT), Bangalore, India, 21–23 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.; Hou, G.; Ou, J. WSN-based monitoring system for factory aquaculture. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 5th International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science, Beijing, China, 27–29 June 2014; pp. 439–442. [Google Scholar]
- Morillo, P.; Orduña, J.M.; Fernández, M.; García-Pereira, I. Comparison of WSN and IoT approaches for a real-time monitoring system of meal distribution trolleys: A case study. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 87, 242–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ray, P.P. A survey of IoT cloud platforms. Future Comput. Inform. J. 2016, 1, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gopalakrishnan, P.; Abhishek, S.; Ranjith, R.; Venkatesh, R.; Jai, S.V. Smart Pipeline Water Leakage Detection System. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2017, 12, 5559–5564. [Google Scholar]
- Vinoj, J.; Gavaskar, S. Smart City Underground Water Leak and Theft Detection Systemwith IOT. Int. J. Sci. Res. Comput. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2018, 3, 632–640. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, R.; Baz, M.; Narayana, C.L.; Rashid, M.; Gehlot, A.; Akram, S.V.; Alshamrani, S.S.; Prashar, D.; AlGhamdi, A.S. Zigbee and Long-Range Architecture Based Monitoring System for Oil Pipeline Monitoring with the Internet of Things. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.; Baz, M.; Gehlot, A.; Rashid, M.; Khurana, M.; Akram, S.V.; Alshamrani, S.S.; AlGhamdi, A.S. Water Quality Monitoring and Management of Building Water Tank Using Industrial Internet of Things. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, P.; Wang, J.; Sangaiah, A.K.; Xie, Y.; Yin, X. Analysis and Prediction of Water Quality Using LSTM Deep Neural Networks in IoT Environment. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Esspressif_Website. Available online: https://www.espressif.com/en/products/socs/ (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Arduino_WebSite. Available online: https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/Products (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Raspberrypi_Website. Available online: https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/ (accessed on 13 September 2021).
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haddaway, N.; McGuinness, L.; Pritchard, C. PRISMA2020, R package and ShinyApp for producing PRISMA 2020 compliant flow diagrams. Zenodo 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, Y.; Ge, X.; Fang, C.; Fan, Y. A Systematic Literature Review of Android Malware Detection Using Static Analysis. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 116363–116379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sohan, M.F.; Basalamah, A. A Systematic Literature Review and Quality Analysis of Javascript Malware Detection. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 190539–190552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, S.; Yadav, S.; Yashaswini, H.M.; Salvi, S. An IoT-Based Smart Water Microgrid and Smart Water Tank Management System; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 417–431. [Google Scholar]
- Nikeeta, P.K.; Kiranmayie, N.; Manishankar, P.; Nitej, C.K.; Murthy, V. Water Management System Using IOT. Int. J. Comput. Trends Technol. 2020, 68, 244–247. [Google Scholar]
- Lade, S.; Vyas, P.; Walavalkar, V.; Wankar, B.; Yadav, P. Water Management System Using IoT with WSN. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 5, 3079–3082. [Google Scholar]
- Lakshmi, P.; Mounika, V.; Sri, V.; Pragna; Vikas, K. Smart Water Tank: An IoT based Android Application. Iconic Res. Eng. J. 2018, 1, 162–165. [Google Scholar]
- Parimala, S.; Meesala, S.; Jyothi, N.A.; Dash, A. Monitoring the Water Storage Facilities using Internet of Things. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 2018, 9, 1507–1516. [Google Scholar]
- Durga, S.; Ramakrishna, M.; Dayanandam, G. Autonomous Water tank Filling System using IoT. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2018, 6, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaiad, A.T.; Ghayyib, H.S. Controlling and monitoring of automation water supply system based on IoT with theft identification. Int. J. Res.-GRANTHAALAYAH 2017, 5, 320–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sowmya, K.P.S.; Susmitha, K.; Sai, N.A.; Suma, N.; Sivaiah, N. Internet of Things (IoT) Enabled Water Monitoring SYSTEM. Iconic Res. Eng. J. 2018, 1, 40–43. [Google Scholar]
- Pawaskar, M.C.; Gadikar, P.; Kambli, P.; Pawar, S.; Savardekar, S. GSM Based Water Control and Management. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2017, 4, 1927–1931. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, N.; Sasi, A.; Deep, A. IoT based Water Level Management System. J. Xidian Univ. 2020, 14, 622–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dissanayaka, R.M.S.M.; Wickramaarachchi, H. IoT Based Water Level Monitoring System Using NodeMCU. In Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Applied Science, Business & Industrial Research, Kuliyapitiya, Sri Lanka, 31 March 2019; ISSN 2279-1558. ISBN 978-955-7442-27-3. [Google Scholar]
- Natividad, J.; Palaoag, T. IoT based model for monitoring and controlling water distribution. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 482, 012045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, P.P.; Patil, A.A.; Ingleshwar, S.S. IoT based smart water tank with Android application. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud) (I-SMAC), Palladam, India, 10–11 February 2017; pp. 600–603. [Google Scholar]
- Malche, T.; Maheshwary, P. Internet of Things (IoT) Based Water Level Monitoring System for Smart Village. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Communication and Networks, Ahmedabad, India, 19–20 February 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Wadekar, S.; Vakare, V.; Prajapati, R.; Yadav, S.; Yadav, V. Smart water management using IOT. In Proceedings of the 2016 5th International Conference on Wireless Networks and Embedded Systems (WECON), Rajpura, India, 14–16 October 2016; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Charles, A.; Ayylusamy, C.; Raj, J.D.; Kumar, K.; Thiruvarasan, K.E. IOT Based Water Level Monitoring System Using Labview. Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2018, 118, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
- Asif, S.S.; Doddaguni, S.R.; Kamagond, T.G.; Anala, M.R.; Mamatha, T. Household Water Resource Monitoring and Leakage Detection. Int. J. Soft Comput. Eng. 2020, 9, 12–17. [Google Scholar]
- MIT_IoT: MIT App Inventor + IoT. Available online: http://iotappinventormitedu/#/LearnMore (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Saraswathi, V.; Rohit, A.; Sakthivel, S.; Sandheep, T.J. Water Leakage System Using IoT. Int. J. Innov. Res. Eng. Manag. 2018, 5, 67–69. [Google Scholar]
- Li, K.; Jia, H.; Liu, M. ZigBee Wireless Sensor Network Using Physics-Based Optimally Sampling for Soil Moisture Measurement. In Proceedings of the 2011 Third International Conference on Communications and Mobile Computing, Qingdao, China, 18–20 April 2011; pp. 505–508. [Google Scholar]
- Srivastava, S.; Vaddadi, S.; Sadistap, S. Smartphone-based System for water quality analysis. Appl. Water Sci. 2018, 8, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alldatasheets. Available online: https://www.alldatasheet.com/ (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Micro_Bit_Website. Available online: https://microbit.org/ (accessed on 11 September 2021).
- GitHub_Website. Available online: https://github.com/ (accessed on 13 September 2021).
- Lee, I. Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity: Literature Review and IoT Cyber Risk Management. Future Internet 2020, 12, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forescout_Research_Labs: The Enterprise of Things Security Report: The State of IoT Security in 2020. Available online: https://www.forescout.com/the-enterprise-of-things-security-report-state-of-iot-security-in-2020/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=iot_emea&gclid=CjwKCAjw7fuJBhBdEiwA2lLMYUYZ20MstFI0kRatlqyWTK888L49A488OMZYQlO-fGE8Z85MrwXdeRoCGA4QAvD_BwE (accessed on 13 September 2021).
- IoT_Routers_and_Gateways: Cisco IoT Gateways. Available online: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/internet-of-things/iot-gateways.html#~benefits (accessed on 4 June 2021).
- Langkemper, S. The Most Important Security Problems with IoT Devices. Available online: https://wwweurofins-cybersecuritycom/news/security-problems-iot-devices/ (accessed on 13 December 2021).
- Zhou, B.; Li, L. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Security monitoring for intelligent water-saving precision irrigation system using cloud services in multimedia context. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2020, 79, 9705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ogonji, M.M.; Okeyo, G.; Wafula, J.M. A survey on privacy and security of Internet of Things. Comput. Sci. Rev. 2020, 38, 100312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jurcut, A.; Niculcea, T.; Ranaweera, P.; Le-Khac, N.-A. Security Considerations for Internet of Things: A Survey. SN Comput. Sci. 2020, 1, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bae, W.-I.; Kwak, J. Smart card-based secure authentication protocol in multi-server IoT environment. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2020, 79, 15793–15811. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Turjman, F.; Lemayian, J.P. Intelligence, security, and vehicular sensor networks in internet of things (IoT)-enabled smart-cities: An overview. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020, 87, 106776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, R.; Alsmadi, I. Machine learning approaches to IoT security: A systematic literature Rev. Things 2021, 14, 100365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jun, P.; Lijuan, W.; Li, X.; Xin, Y. Optimal allocation of water resources based on water environment security in Shenbei region, Liaoning. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Symposium on Water Resource and Environmental Protection, Xi’an, China, 20–22 May 2011; pp. 562–565. [Google Scholar]
Reference | Major Features | Comments |
---|---|---|
[66] | Redefining framework for smart systems to monitor water | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[67] | Water leakage detection in the main supply pipes | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[68] | Feasibility of WSN to monitor sinkholes and leakage | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[69] | Reducing water wastage using IoT technology; In addition, less coverage is also given to water quality, level, and leakage control | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[70] | WSN based monitoring for leakage in water supply pipelines | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[71] | Management of the water distribution network through smart water grid | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
[72] | IoT-based monitoring of water quality in the underground and overhead tanks. | Not focused on smart monitoring of water storage tanks |
Acronym | Definition | Acronym | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
IoT | Internet-of-Things | WSN | Wireless Sensors Network |
IoT-WST | IoT Controlled Water Storage Tank | ADC | Analogue-to-digital Convertor |
WHO | World Health Organization | MCU | Microcontroller Unit |
USEPA | The United States Environmental Protection Agency | I/O | Input/Output |
RO | Reverse Osmosis | DAC | Digital-to-Analog Converter |
UIDs | Unique Identifiers | LCM | Liquid Crystal Module |
WAN | Wide Area Network | SNU | Sensors Node Unit |
GU | Gateway Unit | CSU | Cloud Server Unit |
UIU | User Interface Unit | GSM | Global System of Mobile Communication |
GPRS | General Radio Packet Service | CPU | Central Processing Unit |
SMS | Short Message Service | USB | Universal Serial Bus |
IDE | Integrated Development Environment | SoC | System-on-Chip |
UML | Unified Modeling Language | DC | Direct Current |
MIT | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | SQL | Structured Query Language |
LED | Light Emitting Diode | HTML | Hypertext Markup Language |
I2C | Inter-Integrated Circuit | UART | Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter |
SPI | Serial Peripheral Interface | PCB | Printed Circuit Board |
SRAM | Static Random-Access Memory | LDR | Light Dependent Resistor |
ML | Machine Learning | WS | Water Sensor |
CSMS | Capacitive Soil Moisture Sensor | LIDAR | Light Detection and Ranging |
AI | Artificial Intelligence | PIN | Personal Identification Number |
Ref. | Sensors | Actuators | Processing Units | IDE | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
[92] | HC-SR04 | Electromechanical relay module; Solenoid valve; Water pump | Arduino Uno (8-bit MCU); GSM/GPRS SIM900A | Arduino IDE, ATOM, and Ionic framework; ThingSpeak IoT platform | Hardware needs further improvement to reduce the system’s overall cost |
[93] | Water sensor; Water flow sensor (YF-G1) | Solenoid valve; Water pump | Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+; MCP3008 (8-channels, 10-bit ADC Chip) | Not specified | Hardware not optimized; Sensor to detect water level is not reliable |
[94] | HC-SR04 | Motor pump | Arduino Uno; ESP8266 Wi-Fi transceiver | Arduino IDE; Webpage | Leakage detection not considered |
[95] | HC-SR04 | Electromechanical relay; Water pump | Arduino Uno; NodeMCU (ESP8266) | Arduino IDE; Blynk IoT-Platform | Leakage detection not considered; Hardware not optimized |
[96] | HC-SR04 | Not used | Arduino Uno; GSM/GPRS SIM900A | Arduino IDE; UML | Only water level is monitored |
[97] | HC-SR04; Water flow sensor | Solenoid valve; Water pump | Arduino Uno; GSM/GPRS SIM900A; Power bank | Arduino IDE; ThingSpeak IoT-Platform | Promising idea presented, but leakage is not entertained |
[51] | US-020 (Ultrasonic sensor); Water sensor | Solenoid valve; DC micro diaphragm pump; Electromechanical relay | Arduino Mega 2560 kit (8-bit MCU); SIMCOM SIM900 modem; ULN2003 to control Relay | Arduino IDE; Android application | The overall system is sound, but its leakage detection unit needs further improvement. |
[98] | Water sensor; Water flow sensor | Solenoid valves; Submersible water pumps; Relays | Arduino Nano kit (8bit MCU, ATmega328); Raspberry Pi2; GSM/GPRS SIM900A. | Arduino IDE; Adafruit Cloud IoT platform | Hardware has redundancy. Water levels are discrete, four only |
[99] | HC-SR04 | - | Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+ | ThingSpeak IoT platform; Python. | Only water level is monitored |
[100] | Magnetic float sensors | Water pumps; Relays | AT89C51 (8-bit MCU); GSM SIM800 Module | MIT App Inventor | Leakage not considered |
[101] | HC-SR04 | Water pumps; Relays | NodeMCU | SQL server | Leakage not considered. In addition, technical details are not enough |
[102] | HC-SR04 | Water pumps; Relay module | NodeMCU | Firebase real-time database; Fusion chart; Webpage (CSS, HTML and JavaScript) | Leakage not considered |
[103] | HC-SR04; 5V Analog water pressure sensor | 220VAC 2-way motorized electric ball-valve; Water pump; Relays | Arduino Uno; SIM800 GSM shield; Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+; micro-SD card; LED monitor, mouse, and keyboard | Arduino IDE; Raspbian operating system, Apache (Linux version), PHP (LAMP), MySQL, and Python | Leakage monitoring method is not effective |
[104] | HC-SR04 | Water pump; Relays | NodeMCU; Wi-Fi hot spot | Firebase IoT platform; MIT App Inventor | Leakage not considered |
[65] | HC-SR04 | Submersible water pump; Relay module | Arduino Uno; Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+ | Python2; Flask; Webpage | Leakage not considered; technically poor. Hardware redundancy exist |
[105] | APG—Series PT-500-P1—Level Transmitters (proposed) | - | Arduino Uno R3; Arduino Ethernet Shield | Arduino IDE; Carriots IoT platform; Freeboard; REST API | Only water level is monitored |
[106] | Single-stranded wire (as water level sensor) connected with transistor, BC547 | Water pumps; Relays | CC3200MOD Simple Link (32-bit RISC ARM processor); Local Wi-Fi router | Energia IDE; CC320 Launchpad drivers; Uniflash software | Only four levels are monitored |
[107] | HC-SR04 | Solenoid valve; Water pump | NodeMCU; NI DAQ (USB-6009); Desktop PC | LABVIEW; Google IoT platform | Leakage not considered; Hardware is not optimized |
[108] | HC-SR04; LED/LDR for turbidity; Water flow sensor | Water pump and Relays | NodeMCU | ThingSpeak | Technical details could be improved |
S. No: | Ultrasonic Sensor | TF-Mini-LIDAR | Vertical-Cavity Surface-Emitting Laser (VCSEL)—VCNL36826S |
---|---|---|---|
(a) | Signal: 40 kHz sound pulses | Operating center wavelength: 850nm (Infrared light centered around); Test frequency: 100 Hz | 940nm peak wavelength of VCSEL; Maximum Frequency: 100 kHz |
(b) | Supply voltage: 5 VDC | Supply voltage: 4.5~6 VDC | 2.62 V–3.6 V |
(c) | Working current: 15 mA | LED peak current: 800 mA; average power consumption: 0.12 watt | Typical current: 20mA |
(d) | Range: 0.02~4.0 m | Range: 0.03~12 m Maximum operating range at 10% reflectivity: 5m | Range up to 200 mm (7.87402 inches) |
(e) | Measuring angle: 15° | Acceptance angle: 2.3° | 60° Proximity sensor view angle |
(f) | Trigger input signal:10µS TTL pulse | - | - |
(g) | Dimension: 45 × 20 × 15 mm3 | Dimension: 45 × 15 × 16 mm3 | 2.55 × 2.05 × 1.0 mm3 (L × W × H) |
(h) | Typical cost: 2.13~7.7 USD | Typical cost: 40~53 USD | Typical cost: 2.77 USD |
(i) | Communication interface: Digital I/O | Communication interface: UART | I2C bus output type |
(j) | - | - | 12-bit ADC for signal conditioning |
S. No: | Development Kits (Significant Features of Kit, Not Processor) | Comments | |
---|---|---|---|
(1) | Development kit: | Arduino Uno Rev3 [86] | ESP8266 Transceiver or GSM/GPRS needed for IoT applications. |
CPU: | ATmega328P (8-bit microcontroller) | ||
Frequency: | 16 MHz | ||
Memory: | 2KB SRAM, 1KB EEPROM, and 32KB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 14 Digital I/O pins (16 PWM) and 6 ADC pins | ||
Communication: | I2C and SPI | ||
Built-in security: | Nil | ||
(2) | Development kit: | Arduino Mega 2560 Rev3 [86] | ESP8266 Transceiver or GSM/GPRS needed for IoT applications. |
CPU: | ATmega2560 (8bit microcontroller) | ||
Frequency: | 16 MHz | ||
Memory: | 8KB SRAM, 4KB EEPROM, and 256KB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 54 digital I/O (15 PWM) and 16 ADC pins | ||
Communication: | URAT0, UART1, UART2, UART3, I2C, and SPI | ||
built-in security: | Nil | ||
(3) | Development kit: | Arduino Due [86] | ESP8266 Transceiver or GSM/GPRS needed for IoT applications. |
CPU: | 32-bit Atmel SAM3 × 8E ARM Cortex-M3 CPU | ||
Frequency: | 84 MHz | ||
Memory: | 96KB SRAM and 512KB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 54 digital I/O (12 PWM), 12 ADC pins, and 2 DAC pins | ||
Communication: | SPI, UART, and I2C | ||
built-in security: | Nil | ||
(4) | Development kit: | Arduino Nano 33 IoT [86] | It is specifically developed for the IoT products |
CPU: | SAMD21 Cortex®-M0+ 32-bit low power ARM MCU | ||
Frequency: | 48MHz | ||
Memory: | 32KB SRAM and 256KB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 14 digital I/O (11 PWM) | ||
Communication: | Wi-Fi and Bluetooth® via u-blox NINA-W102; UART, I2C, and SPI | ||
built-in security: | Microchip® ECC608 crypto chip | ||
(5) | Development kit: | SP-01S ESP8266 Wi-Fi Module [85] | In standalone mode, it can control devices using four digital I/O pins. In general, it can provide services to other Kits such as Arduino Uno, Mega, and Due while controlling things in IoT. |
CPU: | Tensilica L106 32-bit RISC processor | ||
Frequency: | 80MHz, 160MHz | ||
Memory: | 1 MiB of built-in flash; 32 KiB instruction RAM, 32 KiB instruction cache RAM, 80 KiB user-data RAM and 16 KiB ETS system-data RAM; External QSPI flash: up to 16 MiB is supported (512 KiB to 4 MiB typically included). | ||
Peripherals: | Four digital I/O | ||
Communication: | Wi-Fi with on-board antenna; it supports Station/SoftAP/SoftAP + Station wireless network mode | ||
built-in security: | IEEE 802.11 standard security features all supported, including WFA, WPA/WPA2, and WAPI; Secure boot; Flash encryption 1024-bit OTP, up to 768-bit for customers; Cryptographic hardware acceleration: AES, SHA-2, RSA, elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), random number generator (RNG). | ||
(6) | Development kit: | NodeMCU ESP8266 [85] | Specifically developed for the IoT applications |
CPU: | Tensilica 32-bit RISC CPU Xtensa LX106 | ||
Frequency: | 80 MHz | ||
Memory: | 64KB SRAM and 4MB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 11 digital I/O, PWM pins, 1 ADC pin, | ||
Communication: | UART, SPI, I2C; Wi-Fi module, with onboard antenna | ||
built-in security: | IEEE 802.11 standard security features all supported, including WFA, WPA/WPA2, and WAPI; Secure boot; Flash encryption 1024-bit OTP, up to 768-bit for customers; Cryptographic hardware acceleration: AES, SHA-2, RSA, elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), random number generator (RNG). | ||
(7) | Development kit: | ESP-WROOM-32 DEV KIT [85] | Specifically developed for the IoT applications |
CPU: | Tensilica Xtensa 32-bit LX6 microprocessor | ||
Frequency: | Up to 240 MHz | ||
Memory: | 520 KiB SRAM, 448KiB ROM, 8KiB RTC Fast RAM, 8KiB RTC Slow RAM, and 1KiB eFuse | ||
Peripherals: | 30/36 I/Os, ADC/DAC, Hall sensor, Touch I/Os, Temperature sensor, etc. | ||
Communication: | Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, onboard antenna; it supports STA/AP/STA + AP operation mode; I2C, UART, CAN2.0, SPI, I2S, and among others | ||
built-in security: | IEEE 802.11 standard security features all supported, including WFA, WPA/WPA2, and WAPI; Secure boot; Flash encryption 1024-bit OTP, up to 768-bit for customers; Cryptographic hardware acceleration: AES, SHA-2, RSA, elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), random number generator (RNG). | ||
(8) | Development kit: | TTGO T-Call ESP32 with SIM800L GPRS Module [85] | This kit can publish data to a cloud IoT server with a Wi-Fi module or using GSM/GPRS module. |
CPU: | ESPRESSIF-ESP32 240MHz Xtensa® single-/dual-core 32-bit LX6 microprocessor | ||
Frequency: | 240 Mhz | ||
Memory: | FLASH Memory: QSPI flash 4MB/PSRAM 8MB; SRAM: 520 KB SRAM | ||
Peripherals: | LED PWM, TV PWM, I2S, IRGPIO, capacitor touch sensor, ADC, DACLNA pre-amplifier; SIM card: Only supports Nano SIM card; | ||
Communication: | UAR, SPI, SDIO and I2C; Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and SIM800L GSM/GPRS. Communication distance: 300m; Wi-Fi Mode: Station/SoftAP/SoftAP+Station/P2P. | ||
Security: | WPA/WPA2/WPA2-Enterprise/WPS; Encryption Type: AES/RSA/ECC/SHA. | ||
(9) | Development kit: | TTGO LoRa32 SX1276 Board [85] | Using the Lora module, this device can transfer data to other devices over a long distance. |
CPU: | ESP32, SX1279; 32-bit LX6 | ||
Frequency: | 240 Mhz | ||
Memory: | 540 KB SRAM, QSPI 4 MB Flash, | ||
Peripherals: | Digital I/O, ADCs, DACs, PWM, etc. | ||
Communication: | UART, SPI, SDIO, I2C, PWM, I2S, ADC, DAC, Cap Sensor; Wi-Fi (Station/SoftAP/SoftAP+Station/P2P), Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE); LoRa RF range for Europe: 433 MHz, 868 MHz, Australia, and North America: 915 MHz, India: 865 MHz–867 MHz and Asia: 923 MHz; range: 300m. | ||
Security: | WPA/WPA2/WPA2-Enterprise/WPS; Encryption type: AES/RSA/ECC/SHA. | ||
(10) | Development kit: | ESP32 TTGO T-Beam V1.1 [85] | With Lora, it can send data up to 16Km (LoS). With GPS, it can track the geolocation of things. |
CPU: | ESP32, SX1279; 32-bit LX6 | ||
Frequency: | 240Mhz of ESP32 | ||
Memory: | 4MB flash memory, 8MB PSRAM | ||
Peripherals: | Digital I/Os, PWM, ADCs, DACs, Touch pins, | ||
Communication: | TTGO Lora module, GPS modules NEO-6M, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth LE via a “3D antenna” on the PCB., UART, C2I, SPI, etc. | ||
Security: | As per ESP32 chip | ||
(11) | Development kit: | BBC Micro: bit V2 [114] | Specifically, developed for IoT |
CPU: | Nordic Semiconductor nRF52833 ARM Cortex-M4 32bit microcontroller | ||
Frequency: | 64MHz | ||
Memory: | 128 KB SRAM and 512 KB Flash | ||
Peripherals: | 19 digital I/Os, 6 ADC pins, 19 DAC pins; onboard 5 × 5 multiplexed LEDs; MMA8653FC 3-axis, 10-bit digital accelerometer; MAG3110 3-axis magnetometer; Pushbuttons; | ||
Communication: | I2C, 2.4 GHz radio antenna, as well as Bluetooth 5.1. | ||
Security: | Not specified. | ||
(12) | Development kit: | Raspberry Pi 4 Model B—8 GB [87] | This kit is a complete 64bit Computer on the single board |
CPU: | A 1.5GHz quad-core 64-bit ARM Cortex-A72 CPU | ||
Frequency: | 1.5GHz | ||
Memory: | 8GB SDRAM | ||
Peripherals: | 40 digital I/Os, 4Kp60 hardware decode of HEVC video, Video Core VI graphics, supporting OpenGL ES 3.x, Dual monitor support, at resolutions up to 4K, | ||
Communication: | Dual-band 2.4 GHz and 5.0 GHz IEEE 802.11b/g/n/ac wireless; two USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 ports; bluetooth 5.0; full-throughput gigabit ethernet; dual-band 802.11ac wireless networking. | ||
Security: | Not specified. |
S. No. | Limitations/Challenges | Recommendations |
---|---|---|
1. | Development of biofilms on sensors | Search market for reliable products |
2. | Most IoT gadgets do not have built-in security | Search for IoT kits that are equipped with the latest security threats or embedded chips |
3. | Most contemporary IoT cloud servers are not free of cost | It is best to develop a private IoT cloud server if possible |
4. | Public IoT cloud servers are not considered secure due to third party involvement | It is best to develop a private IoT cloud server if possible |
5. | Implementation of AI/ML schemes on IoT gadgets | Select at least 32-bit IoT devices with higher clock beats |
6. | Overall system cost | Cost should be minimized to make IoT products accessible to all consumers |
7. | Developing secure Apps for smartphone | It is wise to develop a private App if possible |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jan, F.; Min-Allah, N.; Saeed, S.; Iqbal, S.Z.; Ahmed, R. IoT-Based Solutions to Monitor Water Level, Leakage, and Motor Control for Smart Water Tanks. Water 2022, 14, 309. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030309
Jan F, Min-Allah N, Saeed S, Iqbal SZ, Ahmed R. IoT-Based Solutions to Monitor Water Level, Leakage, and Motor Control for Smart Water Tanks. Water. 2022; 14(3):309. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030309
Chicago/Turabian StyleJan, Farmanullah, Nasro Min-Allah, Saqib Saeed, Sardar Zafar Iqbal, and Rashad Ahmed. 2022. "IoT-Based Solutions to Monitor Water Level, Leakage, and Motor Control for Smart Water Tanks" Water 14, no. 3: 309. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030309
APA StyleJan, F., Min-Allah, N., Saeed, S., Iqbal, S. Z., & Ahmed, R. (2022). IoT-Based Solutions to Monitor Water Level, Leakage, and Motor Control for Smart Water Tanks. Water, 14(3), 309. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030309